(Meta-Philosophy) Nature and Limits of Philosophy(izing)

(Meta-Philosophy) Limits of Philosophy(izing)1The reasons why I explore the nature and the limits of philosophy/izing -it is and has always been my passion since a small child, that what gives meaning to my life and made me who I am, without love for Sophos/wisdom I could not exist. This is partly so because of my nurturing/upbringing (200% honest and sincer parents) and nature (my brain and personality-type). It is the (first) love of my life, followed by visual arts, social sciences, mathematics, astrophysics and some other sciences.2As I live FOR (and not like professional philosophers OFF) philosophy I need to identify, conceptualize and enquire about the seemingly mysterious (see Heidegger, Nietzsche et al) nature of philosophy and the lack of identifying what the nature, the subject-matter and the methods of philosophy and tacit, often negative or misleading assumptioms concerning these things, are. It seems, from what they present to us, that philosophers lack meta-cognition of the discipline and the execution of this socio-cultural practice. https://www.academia.edu/31511435/Nature_and_Limits_of_philosophy_izing_only_2_Pages_3 Instead of dealing with these essential ‘prolegomena’ philosophers dive directly into the doing of what seems to resemble philosophizing. One of the illnesses they suffer from, often without them being aware of it, is -isms. Instead of reflecting on what they do they merely repeat the limitations, like a horse’s blindfold, and draw out the implications of someone’s elses already existing -ism or the development of their own. Most people are aware of some form of -ism and often criticize politicians (and Presidents! for subscribing to them) for -isms such as racism, corruptionism, misogynism, etc – if they were to look at their own thinking and behaviour they will see the many -isms their own attitudes reveal. Google the Book of isms for this or see this publication of mine for a FREE download: https://www.academia.edu/31495642/_Meta-Philosophy_Meta-Cognition_and_Critique_of_Doing_PhilosophizingInstead of merely doing philosophy in a simple manner as possible one sees how philosophers become entwined in the restrictions of their own mixture of implicit and explicit -isms and in the process fabricate all sorts of neologisms and technical terms to create new ideas, things and processes to try and set themselves free from the dark hole they create and dig themselves into always more deeper. See examples of this in the above book concerning the issue of the mind-body problem. Certain philosophers have problems with the nature and the meaning of the concept of mind, others with the notion of body and then of course how to relate and/or reduce or explain the one to or from the other. In the process we find endless, more and more microscopically detailed -isms that are meant to refer to and/or create all sorts of fabricated organs, matter, ideas, processe, phenomena etc – and in the process creating and spelling out the details of the -ism that determines, underlies and direct their cognitively biased thinking.4This brings us to the second self-imposed limitations on philosophy by philosophers namely Cognitive Bias. I added an Appendix on Cognitive Bias, some of the different types and how the operate in misleading ways here (another FREE download book): https://www.academia.edu/31276710/_Meta-Philosophy_Philosophers_and_their_lack_of_Meta-Cognition The include – Bias arises from various processes that are sometimes difficult to distinguish. These include information-processing shortcuts (heuristics)[14] noisy information processing (distortions in the process of storage in and retrieval from memory)[15] the brain’s limited information processing capacity[16] emotional and moral motivations[17] social influence[18]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_biasBiases can be distinguished on a number of dimensions. For example, there are biases specific to groups (such as the risky shift) as well as biases at the individual level. Some biases affect decision-making, where the desirability of options has to be considered (e.g., sunk costs fallacy). Others such as illusory correlation affect judgment of how likely something is, or of whether one thing is the cause of another. A distinctive class of biases affect memory,[23] such as consistency bias (remembering one’s past attitudes and behavior as more similar to one’s present attitudes.http://www.cognitivebiasparade.com/http://www.williamjames.com/Science/ERR.htmhttps://www.scribd.com/doc/30548590/Cognitive-Biases-A-Visual-Study-Guidehttps://www.wired.com/2017/02/cognitive-bias-president-trump-understands-better/http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2017/01/kahneman-biases-act-like-optical-illusions.htmlhttp://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biasesFour problems that biases help us address: Information overload, lack of meaning, the need to act fast, and how to know what needs to be remembered for later. Inf

Source: (Meta-Philosophy) Nature and Limits of Philosophy(izing)